[Tfug] tfug Digest, Vol 63, Issue 45

Paul Steinbach MIS at samlevitz.com
Mon Oct 27 11:15:05 MST 2008


We are heavy users of Centos and Firefox on thin clients.  When the jump 
to FF3 broke an app on IIS we installed FF2 in /opt/ and hacked the 
htmlview for those users.  Just a thought...


tfug-request at tfug.org wrote:
> Send tfug mailing list submissions to
> 	tfug at tfug.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	tfug-request at tfug.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	tfug-owner at tfug.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of tfug digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: List confusion (erich)
>    2. 32-bit browser plugins on 64-bit OS (Rich)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 13:12:16 -0700
> From: erich <erich1 at copper.net>
> Subject: Re: [Tfug] List confusion
> To: Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
> Message-ID: <4904CF20.4000702 at copper.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> OK,
>       I was quietly doing my own form of censorship, and deleting his 
> posts on the webmail
> interface before downloading messages into my server. Thanks. I am now 
> spared of that
> chore.
>
>                                                                                                                          
> Erich
>
> Jon wrote:
>   
>> Eric Christian's posts are being moderated. I've seen too many people 
>> unsubscribe over the past weeks. Some voiced it to the list, others 
>> privately to me and some just silently left. Before we go in to how 
>> those people need to use Gmail and mute people, learn how to ignore or 
>> just get a thicker skin I want to back track and talk a bit about the 
>> history of the list and what it used to be used for.
>>
>> Tyler and other people long ago founded the Tucson Free Unix Group as 
>> a place for people to talk openly about Free Unix (which branched in 
>> to Linux), find solutions to problems, general networking with other 
>> people in the local community and possibly beyond and anything else 
>> technology related. I came on board several years after it's inception 
>> and was loosely affiliated by mere association with one or more of the 
>> founding members. I've seen it go through many changes. The main 
>> change and the one I think most would agree is the focus of topics 
>> from technology related to just an open forum where anything goes and 
>> staying farther away from its roots.
>>
>> Only recently have things gotten worse and the catalyst in many 
>> people's eyes was Eric and the people that can't help but promote the 
>> thread by responding and fueling his desire to "inform" people of all 
>> the bad things he's found on the Internet.
>>
>> This is the sole reason he has been moderated. I'm trying my best to 
>> be nice about it all but at the end of the day he's just a troll and 
>> he has succeeded in doing what trolls do - posting to the list with 
>> one agenda, to annoy people. I've moderated his posts and will review 
>> each one. If it's clear it's on topic I'll let him send to the list. 
>> If not it'll get rejected.
>>
>> I want this list to be as constructive as possible and I do realize 
>> that from time-to-time people are going to stray OT. That doesn't mean 
>> I'm going to come down on them for doing so. Eric was a repeat 
>> offender and it was clear he was only posting garbage and I for one 
>> was tired of seeing it as I know other people were too.
>>
>> I know some people will not like the decision to do this. For them I 
>> apologize and would like to loosely quote someone on the list - 'Maybe 
>> you should change your expectations'   ;)
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:44:14 -0700
> From: Rich <r-lists at studiosprocket.com>
> Subject: [Tfug] 32-bit browser plugins on 64-bit OS
> To: Tucson Free Unix Group <tfug at tfug.org>
> Message-ID: <A950A5F6-D6D3-4566-A6CF-4172C459D5D8 at studiosprocket.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> *dodges the tumbleweed*
>
> Time for a puzzler.
>
> RHEL and CentOS come in 32-bit and 64-bit versions. They've recently  
> upgraded the browser in v4.7 to Firefox 3.x.  I guess these are  
> CentOS related, because RedHat has made it clear to me that they  
> won't support any of these options.
>
> Here's the difficulty. Without moving to an alternate browser (Opera,  
> for instance), how can I get *all* the useful 32-bit plugins to  
> function properly?
>
> These are: Acrobat Reader, Flash, Java, and Helix (Real)
>
> First option: nspluginwrapper
> So far, I have the 64-bit Firefox, with some 64-bit plugins, plus  
> nspluginwrapper, which provides a platform for 32-bit plugins on 64- 
> bit browsers.
>
> Acroread, flash, and helix work fine. But the 32-bit java plugin  
> doesn't work. I get something similar to this (not at the box right now)
>
>    # nspluginwrapper -i <path-to-java-plugin>
>    This is not a valid NPAPI plugin
>
> I know the next version of Java is supposed to include a 64-bit  
> plugin. Great. So in six months time I'll stop asking...
>
> Second option: 32-bit browser
> Next line of attack was to use a 32-bit Firefox. Here's how this fails:
>
> * removed 64-bit Firefox
> * installed 32-bit Firefox and the *advertised* dependencies from the  
> media
> * installed the *secret* dependencies (libcairo and libpangocairo)
>
> Now when I launch firefox, it complains it requires GTK+ 2.10 or  
> greater.
>
> RHEL4.x uses GTK+ 2.4, but RedHat backported Firefox 3.x so it can  
> run on GTK+ 2.4 instead.
>
> So, I'm wondering if anyone's determined what else is needed to get  
> Firefox 32-bit to realize it's been backported, and that GTK+2.4 is  
> okay!
>
> This wouldn't be a problem if GTK+ was at 2.10, but that would mean  
> upgrading half the OS -- to run the Java plugin.
>
> Question 3: is there a portable 32-bit Firefox that installs anywhere  
> (y'know, like Windows and Mac have?)
>
> Question 4 (marked philosophical/OT): Why bother with 64-bit browsers  
> at all? The point of 64-bit apps is to gain access to >4GB of RAM.  
> But if your browser is using more than 4GB of RAM, there's a problem,  
> right?
>
> R.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> tfug mailing list
> tfug at tfug.org
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>
>
> End of tfug Digest, Vol 63, Issue 45
> ************************************
>
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Scanned with Copfilter Version 0.84beta3a (P3Scan 2.2.1)
> AntiSpam:  SpamAssassin 3.2.3
> AntiVirus: ClamAV 0.91.2/8499 - Sun Oct 26 19:46:22 2008
> by Markus Madlener @ http://www.copfilter.org
>
>   


-- 
Paul Steinbach
MIS Manager
Sam Levitz Furniture

E-mail: MIS at samlevitz.com
Phone:  520.624.7443 X2571
Cell:   520.247.5730






More information about the tfug mailing list